Md. Ajmat @ Md. Azmat @ Mohammad Ajmat v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67004 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1.
Md. Ajmat @ Md. Azmat @ Mohammad Ajmat Son of Md. Iliyas Resident of Mohalla -Purani Bazar Lakhisarai Ward NO 9 P.S- Lakhisarai DistrictLakhisarai 2.
Md. Ibran @ Md. Imran @ Imran son of Md. Nishar @ Md. Nishad Resident of vill- Bari Dargah, Ps- Lakhisarai, Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Naziya Khatoon @ Nazia Khatun Daughater of Md. Samsad Resident of vill- Bari Dargah, Purani Bazar, Ps- Lakhisarai, Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehends their arrest in connection with Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 501C of 2024, dated 18.07.2022, registered under Sections 341, 354(A), 354(B), 354(D), 506, 509, 354, 376, 511/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on the alleged date and time of the occurrence, the complainant was returning to her house from Megha Coaching Dance Centre and in the way the accused persons started outrage modesty with her. On hulla raised by complainant, both the accused persons
2/4 escaped from there, after giving threatening that if she will go to police station, a dire consequence would be faced. The written report was made in the Mahila Police Station, Lakhisarai.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have lodged F.I.R. against the informant and his family members vide Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 528 of 2022, dated 23.06.2022. The informant is the next door neighbour and an altercation took place between them. F.I.R. was lodged by the wife of the petitioner being Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 528 of 2022 on 23.06.2022. In retaliation, the mother of the informant is said to have lodged the instant case being Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 529 of 2022 on 23.06.2022. It has next been submitted that on investigation the Police submitted Final Form, which was accepted by the court below and thereafter the informant is said to have filed a Protest Petition before the Court concerned treating to be complaint, in which cognizance has been taken and these petitioners apprehending their arrest, has filed the instant anticipatory bail application.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the fact that informant as well as the petitioners are on inimical terms and previously the petitioners have lodged F.I.R., in retaliation, the instant case was registered by
3/4 the informant, in which Final Form was submitted, which has been treated as complaint case, in which cognizance has been taken and there is counter case of present story, which was investigated and found to be false by the Police, let the above named petitioners, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Protestcum-Complaint Case No. 501C of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as well as the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner (s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner (s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner (s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
4/4 cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner (s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) pravinkumar/- U T